.
Feedback

POLL: Do You Want To See Electronic Message Boards Go Up in San Carlos?

With the city entertaining the idea of message boards, we want to know what you think!

The San Carlos City Council entertained the idea of replacing the “unappealing” A-Frame signs with electronic message boards at the following intersections:


• Brittan Avenue and Alameda de las Pulgas

• Brittan Avenue and Cedar Street, at a corner of Burton Park

• San Carlos Avenue and Chestnut Street, near the Adult Community Center

• San Carlos Avenue and Elm Street, near City Hall Park

• Laurel Street Park.

“The upfront cost for each board varies from about $15,000 to $45,000, depending on the size and how many colors are used,” reported the San Jose Mercury News. “Operating a sign 16 hours a day year-round would cost roughly $850 for electricity," city staff estimated.

San Carlos Patch wants to know what you think…do you want to see electronic message boards around the city?

Vote in our new poll!

Peter Cleaveland October 26, 2011 at 07:25 pm
Not a realistic expenditure of funds in a city where they've had to outsource police protection and many other city functions. Put the money in the bank, or better yet a credit union and get prepared for that eventual rainy day.
Andy C October 26, 2011 at 08:06 pm
This is a waste of time and resources. They would be vandalized by all of the degenerates that the city now attracts. What is the push for this anyway?
Steveo October 26, 2011 at 10:50 pm
Sign, sign, everywhere a sign
Blockin' out the scenery, breakin' my mind Do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign?
Suzy Soteriou October 27, 2011 at 10:51 am
I thought we were broke?
Ann Williams October 27, 2011 at 11:00 am
The A-Frame signs are easy enough to read at very low cost. Electronic message boards would be a distraction to drivers which could cause accidents. What is the rationale?
janet Hall October 27, 2011 at 12:34 pm
Personally, I think a well-located sign (City Hall Park? Burton?) might help keep our residents more aware of upcoming meetings & events, etc. while helping to remove the clutter of some of the A-Frames.
Beth Robertson October 27, 2011 at 01:51 pm
Can you include a photo of the current signs and what the new ones that the city is considering look like?
Bob Winters October 27, 2011 at 04:56 pm
By A-Frame, are you referring to the "Open House" like signs that promote upcoming events such as Art & Wine, or AYSO Sign Ups?
Louis Gascoigne October 28, 2011 at 09:43 am
This sounds amazing. Instead of using half the cost of one of these ugly permanent signs to pay for the garbage rate hike for the disingenuous "recycling" program let's blight the community! Let's lose our police and fire, but hey we have signs that have electronic in the name.
Lin October 28, 2011 at 03:26 pm
Absolutely NOT! Why not spend the money where its needed? Like more roving law enforcement in our neighborhoods or subsidizing the youth center. Cant wait to vote some of the yahoos out!
Susan Crumpler October 28, 2011 at 03:39 pm
Why not use San Carlos Patch to advertise all events and happenings? It is already up and running. Just make sure every resident is aware of the site. There is no need for any type of signage.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from San Carlos Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Bob Winters June 18, 2013 at 08:51 am
Best of luck finding good homes, we already have two cats. You may want to consider this advertisingRead More technique: http://i41.tinypic.com/2s17tk0.jpg
Michael G. Stogner June 15, 2013 at 05:07 pm
Marl Olbert said this right after refusing to second Matt Grocott's motion for 2 week delay of vote.Read More I wasn't here at the time but i talked to various people who were. It's my understanding that when Mr. Maltbie was hired into this position he was offered a significantly below market salary. both in terms of compensation and provision I think part because he has never been a city manager before. and he had to prove himself. you can make a argument that that wasn't fair. if you think the person is capable for doing the job not necessarily the fact that they don't have the experience. it happens all over the place it happened to me personally it's just a part of the accepted process but another part of the accepted process is that if the person proves themselves you have to keep faith with them and if you don't you're actually sending a message You're saying that you can't trust us and i totally think that Mr. Maltbie is worth the pay, but besides that i think it is a issue of integrity and maintaining the integrity of the negotiation process and the hiring process that's why I'm going to vote yes for it.
Michael G. Stogner June 15, 2013 at 05:08 pm
I would like to know who those various people were who gave Mark Olbert that understanding.
Michael G. Stogner June 17, 2013 at 04:54 pm
Council member Mark Olbert one who refused to second Mr. Grocott's motion made an interestingRead More statement. "I wasn't here at the time but i talked to various people who were. It's my understanding that when Mr. Maltbie was hired into this position he was offered a significantly below market salary." I know for a fact that he didn't talk to Matt Grocott who was there. That leaves 3 potentials, 2 of them are deceased and the 3rd was Andy Klein who did not attend that meeting so he didn't vote. I would like to know who the "various people who were" are.
Marc Parent June 11, 2013 at 07:50 am
San Carlos just spent 10 Million after lawsuit from the "Bay Keepers", more activistsRead More wanting more money?
Holly Bell June 8, 2013 at 01:23 pm
Unbelievable!! Many voters are watching this issue closely and will remember this vote. Evidently,Read More these commissioners believe that resident's have no voice in city decision-making. Someone please name those commissioners who disregarded the loud-and-clear preference of the people. Time to clean house.
Bob Farkas June 8, 2013 at 02:01 pm
The two commissioners who voted for turf were John Seiling and Ray Merala. It was Ray's lastRead More meeting as a commissioner since he has termed out after 9+ years of service. I think they felt that the needs of the elite CYSO program should take precedence over neighbors and others who use the park. Youth sports seems a principal influencer at Parks and Rec. as they are the largest organized user of the facilities. I agree with many other opponents of this project that we all need to support adequate fields for youth sports. I just think these needs have to be in balance with those of the rest of the community. It was very disappointing that, although it is field availability which is purportedly driving this initiative, there was no available recent data to demonstrate the problem or an analysis of how much of the problem would be addressed by this measure. To a businessman like me, this seems a very unprofessional approach.
Concerned Taxpayer June 8, 2013 at 07:08 pm
This is purely a NIMBY issue. Lets just all be honest about that. The folks who live across fromRead More Highlands Park were the loudest opponents there and were citing all kinds of crazy issues when they should have just been honest and said,"I really don't want to look at more people and cars at the public park that is across the street from me and was there when I moved in." That is essentially the true gripe. NIMBY!!! A very weak argument and unelectable dishonest. Unless you can create more land we have to extend the use at existing parks and fields. This is very logical. We live in California and having to use astro turf stinks but we also live where there is no more available land to utilize. The commissions punted this to the council pure and simple. Well we already know who will vote against it. I am curious who will vote for it?????
Bill June 5, 2013 at 02:53 pm
This post makes zero sense. Bike lanes are a visual reminder to drivers that they must share theRead More road with riders. For every cyclist who is not observing the rules of traffic, I will show you 100 texting drivers. Removing bike lanes is not the answer.